Follow us on social

Us-saudi

If Biden can't stand up to Saudi Arabia, then Congress should, and now

The administration has been sluggish in its pledge to withdraw material support to the Kingdom and help end the blockade in Yemen.

Analysis | Middle East

In sharp contrast to Donald Trump’s uncritical embrace of the Saudi regime and its brutal war in Yemen, President Biden took the opportunity of his first foreign policy speech in February of this year, to pledge an end of U.S. support for “offensive operations” in Yemen along with “relevant arms sales.” 

Biden also appointed a special envoy, veteran diplomat Tim Lenderking, to support United Nations efforts to craft a peace agreement to end the Yemen war. It was a promising start towards ending the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe – a war in which nearly a quarter of a million people have died.

Unfortunately, the Biden administration has been slow to fulfil its promise to help bring peace to Yemen, dragging its feet on key initiatives and falling short on others.

The administration’s early move to suspend arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) pending a review has yielded little change. The Biden team has already cleared the way for a $23 billion sale of F-35 combat aircraft, armed drones, and precision-guided bombs that was offered last November, during the lame duck period of the Trump administration. The decision came despite the UAE’s ongoing role in arming, training, and financing tens of thousands of militias involved in the Yemen war, including extremist groups with ties to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

To its credit, the administration has suspended two bomb sales to Saudi Arabia, but there is a danger that billions in other arms sales might go forward based on the specious argument that they are defensive in nature, despite their potential relevance to the fighting in Yemen. Efforts by members of Congress to get a straight answer from the administration regarding which sales are considered to be relevant to offensive operations in Yemen have been rebuffed, thus making it unclear which sales will ultimately go through.

In the meantime, the administration and Lenderking haven’t pressed hard enough for an end to the Saudi blockade of Yemen, which has hindered the delivery of vital fuel and humanitarian supplies. The lives of hundreds of thousands of children are now at risk in Yemen, according to David Beasley, the head of the United Nations Food Programme. 

In a speech delivered in March of this year, Lenderking appeared to downplay the humanitarian consequences of the Saudi blockade. The administration has since called for an end to any impediments to getting supplies into Yemen via key ports but it has not followed up its words with determined action. A May 20 letter spearheaded by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) urged the administration to “leverage all influence and tools available, including the potential impact on pending weapons sales, U.S.-Saudi military cooperation, and U.S.-Saudi ties more broadly, to demand that Saudi Arabia immediately and unconditionally stop the use of blockade tactics.” 

Thus far, however, the administration has failed to do so. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who has been a leader in pushing for an end to U.S. support for the Saudi role in Yemen, has called for a new U.S. approach to ending the war and insisted that “Lenderking is failing” in his mission.

Meanwhile, crucial U.S. support for the Saudi war effort has continued in the form of the provision of maintenance and spare parts for the Saudi arsenal, including crucial support for the Royal Saudi Air Force. As Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institution has noted, the Saudi air force would be grounded in short order without such support. The Biden administration should end the U.S. role in sustaining the Saudi military until Saudi Arabia ends the blockade and enters into a comprehensive peace deal to end the Yemen war.  

In March, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby described U.S.-Saudi military relations as “robust.” The administration should clarify what it means by that and should end the continuing U.S. role in advising the Saudi military, which it has justified as being defensive in nature without supplying any details to prove that that is the case.

In addition, despite President Biden’s identification of Saudi Arabia as a “pariah” during his presidential campaign, his administration has been surprisingly cordial in its relations with the Saudi regime. The administration refrained from holding de facto Saudi leader Mohammed bin Salman accountable for his role in directing the October 2018 murder in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul of U.S.-resident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and Saudi deputy defense minister Khalid Bin Salman — who the CIA determined had assured Khashoggi that it was safe to go to the consulate where he was killed — was welcomed by top U.S. officials in a recent visit to Washington that included meetings with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Joint Chiefs of Staff chair Gen. Mark Milley, and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan.

Given the Biden administration’s failure to craft a policy that is likely to succeed in helping to promote peace in Yemen, it’s time for Congress to act, as called for by a coalition of peace and human rights organizations that have successfully pressed key members of Congress to write letters to the administration urging it to take a more active role in ending the Saudi blockade. One key next step should be Congressional passage of a War Powers Resolution that would end U.S. support for the Saudi and UAE war efforts, along with direct measures to end the provision of U.S. arms, spare parts, and maintenance to the Saudi military. Given the ongoing suffering caused by the war, Yemen can’t wait any longer for immediate, forceful U.S. action to end the war. If the Biden administration won’t act promptly, Congress should.


oldiers from Third Army/U.S. Army Central (Third Army), the South Carolina Army National Guard and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Royal Saudi Land Forces (RSLF) lower their country’s respective flags Feb. 28, 2011 to commemorate the success of Exercise Friendship Two. (Photo Credit: U.S. Army)
Analysis | Middle East
American Special Operations
Top image credit: (shutterstock/FabrikaSimf)

American cult: Why our special ops need a reset

Military Industrial Complex

This article is the latest installment in our Quincy Institute/Responsible Statecraft project series highlighting the writing and reporting of U.S. military veterans. Click here for more information.

America’s post-9/11 conflicts have left indelible imprints on our society and our military. In some cases, these changes were so gradual that few noticed the change, except as snapshots in time.

keep readingShow less
Recep Tayyip Erdogan Benjamin Netanyahu
Top photo credit: President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan (Shutterstock/ Mustafa Kirazli) and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Salty View/Shutterstock)
Is Turkey's big break with Israel for real?

Why Israel is now turning its sights on Turkey

Middle East

As the distribution of power shifts in the region, with Iran losing relative power and Israel and Turkey emerging on top, an intensified rivalry between Tel Aviv and Ankara is not a question of if, but how. It is not a question of whether they choose the rivalry, but how they choose to react to it: through confrontation or peaceful management.

As I describe in Treacherous Alliance, a similar situation emerged after the end of the Cold War: The collapse of the Soviet Union dramatically changed the global distribution of power, and the defeat of Saddam's Iraq in the Persian Gulf War reshuffled the regional geopolitical deck. A nascent bipolar regional structure took shape with Iran and Israel emerging as the two main powers with no effective buffer between them (since Iraq had been defeated). The Israelis acted on this first, inverting the strategy that had guided them for the previous decades: The Doctrine of the Periphery. According to this doctrine, Israel would build alliances with the non-Arab states in its periphery (Iran, Turkey, and Ethiopia) to balance the Arab powers in its vicinity (Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, respectively).

keep readingShow less
Havana, Cuba
Top Image Credit: Havana, Cuba, 2019. (CLWphoto/Shutterstock)

Trump lifted sanctions on Syria. Now do Cuba.

North America

President Trump’s new National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) on Cuba, announced on June 30, reaffirms the policy of sanctions and hostility he articulated at the start of his first term in office. In fact, the new NSPM is almost identical to the old one.

The policy’s stated purpose is to “improve human rights, encourage the rule of law, foster free markets and free enterprise, and promote democracy” by restricting financial flows to the Cuban government. It reaffirms Trump’s support for the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, which explicitly requires regime change — that Cuba become a multiparty democracy with a free market economy (among other conditions) before the U.S. embargo will be lifted.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.